 | Samuel Hinds (bp. of Norwich.) - Logic - 1827 - 196 pages
...the middle term, and another to the whole of it, they must have been both compared to the same. 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises; for that (which is called an illicit process, either of the major or the minor term) would be to employ... | |
 | Samuel Hinds (bp. of Norwich.) - Logic - 1827 - 190 pages
...the middle term, and another to the whole of it, they must have been both compared to the same. 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises; for that (which is called an illicit process, either of the major or the minor term) would be to employ... | |
 | Richard Whately - Logic - 1831 - 440 pages
...the middle term, and another to the whole of it, they must have been both compared to the same. 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises; for that (which is called an illicit process, either of the Major or the Minor term) would be to employ... | |
 | Richard Whately - Logic - 1832 - 386 pages
...the middle term, and another to the whole of it, they must have been both compared to the tame. 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises ; for that (which is called an illicit process either of the Major or the Minor term) would be to employ... | |
 | Charles Wesley - Logic - 1832 - 164 pages
...least, in the premises ; ie hy being the subject of a universal, or predicate of a negative. Rule 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion, which was not distributed in one of the premises ; because you would then employ the whole of a term in the conclusion, when you had employed only a... | |
 | S. E. Parker - Logic - 1837 - 344 pages
...predacious. A. The lion is predacious; therefore A. The lion is not ruminant. (Art. 142.) RULE IV. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises. 1. The contrary to this rule, or employing the whole of a term in the conclusion, of which only a part... | |
 | S. E. PARKER - Logic - 1838 - 340 pages
...middle term proves nothing. R. III. The middle term must be distributed in one of the premises. R. IV. No term must be distributed in the conclusion, which was not distributed in one of the premises. RV Two negative or two particular premises prove nothing. R. VI. If either premiss be particular or... | |
 | Robert Simson (master of Colebrooke house acad, Islington.) - 1838 - 206 pages
...therefore Feathers are contrary to darkness. Is there any other rule respecting the other terms ? Yes; no term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises. Why ? Because we should employ the whole of a term in the conclusion, when we had employed only a part... | |
 | Thomas Solly - Logic - 1839 - 192 pages
...minor premiss, and both subject and predicate in the conclusion. Hence it follows that either some term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in the premises, or else the middle term cannot be distributed in either premiss. We cannot therefore... | |
 | Richard Whately - Logic - 1840 - 508 pages
...the middle term, and another to the whole of it, they must have been both compared to the same. 4th. No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises; for that (which is called an illicit process, either of the Major or the Minor term) would be to employ... | |
| |
No term must be distributed in the conclusion which was not distributed in one of the premises... 
